Author
Topic: Confused.. (Read 4283 times)

Totally confused. I moved almost 3 months ago and there are no Coptic Churches here, but there is a small Coptic community that meets monthly sometimes twice monthly. I have just started attending the Coptic Liturgies (took me a while to find when they were held)

My confusion is due to trying to figure out why the Copts won't attend the Eastern Orthodox Church when there is no Coptic liturgy available. Some of the Copts do attend local Protestant churches however. Also the Ethiopians don't come to the Coptic liturgies preferring to attend the Eastern liturgies, some even communing.

Am I missing something? Is this normal elsewhere too? I noticed that back home the Ethiopians often attended the Greek church instead of ours.

My confusion is due to trying to figure out why the Copts won't attend the Eastern Orthodox Church when there is no Coptic liturgy available.

Am I missing something? Is this normal elsewhere too?

That particular thing is definitely abnormal.

Logged

Quote from: Fr. Thomas Hopko, dystopian parable of the prodigal son

...you can imagine so-called healing services of the pigpen. The books that could be written, you know: Life in the Pigpen. How to Cope in the Pigpen. Being Happy in the Pigpen. Surviving in the Pigpen. And then there could be counselling, for people who feel unhappy in the pigpen, to try to get them to come to terms with the pigpen, and to accept the pigpen.

You might want to just ask the other Copts why they choose to go to a Protestant church rather than the EO one. I can only think of three possible reasons:

1. The Protestant parish is closer to where they live;

2. The EO parish is unfriendly toward OO's. (You never know, it may be that the EO church over there is populated with people from OCnet's private forum. ) I doubt that is the case, though, if the Ethiopians are going there;

3. It could be that this particular group of Copts has had some Protestantizing influences in their lives, and they just feel comfortable in Protestant churches.

I don't know. I would ask and find out. It would be interesting to know the answer.

In any event, if you feel comfortable going to the EO church when the Coptic group is not meeting, I would definitely go there, but I'm not sure you should commune.

The Protestant influences in the Coptic Church have been discussed on a couple of other threads, so nothing needs to be repeated here. However, I know plenty of Copts who go to the Coptic Church for Liturgy in order to Commune, but attend low-church Protestant services for 'worship'. So it wouldn't be surprising if the same type of people wouldn't be interested in going to an EO church, where they could neither commune nor had any cultural ties, but would continue to attend Protestant services for 'worship'.

Also the Ethiopians don't come to the Coptic liturgies preferring to attend the Eastern liturgies, some even communing.

Am I missing something? Is this normal elsewhere too? I noticed that back home the Ethiopians often attended the Greek church instead of ours.

I don't know if it's representative, but I see more people Ethiopian people at my (Greek) parish on a Sunday than I've seen when attending Coptic liturgies. Why that is, I don't know, although most of them seem to have no idea that there is any schism - Orthodox is Orthodox. Perhaps the Greek parishes are just more numerous and easier to find?

You might want to just ask the other Copts why they choose to go to a Protestant church rather than the EO one. I can only think of three possible reasons:

1. The Protestant parish is closer to where they live;

2. The EO parish is unfriendly toward OO's. (You never know, it may be that the EO church over there is populated with people from OCnet's private forum. ) I doubt that is the case, though, if the Ethiopians are going there;

3. It could be that this particular group of Copts has had some Protestantizing influences in their lives, and they just feel comfortable in Protestant churches.

I don't know. I would ask and find out. It would be interesting to know the answer.

In any event, if you feel comfortable going to the EO church when the Coptic group is not meeting, I would definitely go there, but I'm not sure you should commune.

It would be quite wrong to commune without permission of the EO priest, which may or may not require his bishop's permission, and he - I would imagine - would require you have the permission of a Coptic priest.

Actually I did ask that is how I know quite a few go to the Protestant Church, I guess it just seems strange that one would choose that instead of an Orthodox one. I will have to search the forum for the threads about the Protestant influence in the Coptic CCHurch. I do believe it is due to them feeling unwelcome at the EO church.

I attend the EO church most Sundays,but never have nor am planning on communing there.

As for the Ethiopians if I understood correctly for some reason the feel more comfortable at the EO church no has said why that is though, and I can't figure it out.

I don't know where you live, but I'm a member of a Coptic Community in a place that has a lot of Catholic and Protestant churches, and one EO (Greek) church. I've only lived here for about 10 months, but people in our community tell me that before we were assigned our current priests (from the nearest Coptic Churches, one state over) and hence were able to start having services about 16 years ago, the few Copts who were here did go to the Greek church, and were communed there with full knowledge of both the Coptic diocesan bishop and the EO priests and bishop. This stopped, of course, once we were sent Coptic priests, but we still have particularly good relations with the Greeks here. We also seem to attract a few of the Catholics (uniate) people who are of Middle Eastern background, as apparently not all of them are satisfied with the Arabic-language Eastern Catholic liturgies that are held semi-regularly at the local Byzantine Catholic church, so they come to us even though our liturgy is 75-80% English. Go figure.

We have not had such a rush to Protestant services, thank God, but then our priests and also our laity provide a good and relatively constant message regarding our doctrinal stances, which makes it clear why we cannot attend such services. At least one of our members unfortunately did so anyway at least once (he was dating a woman who is "non-denominational" or some such), and rather than being sucked into that life, he came back to report to us how terrible it is and how we should never do as he did, even once! So I think a lot of it can be handled by redoubling our commitment to Orthodoxy, no? At least that is my experience. Maybe it is harder in bigger communities or actual churches (we are about 40 people total).

Back home in Northern California, the OO are all Habesha (Ethiopians and Eritreans), but they commune at the local EO (OCA and Bulgarian) churches, because there is no OO church of any kind for many, many miles. They are fully integrated, so I don't suppose that there is much of a problem with being given the cold shoulder as there might be in other EO parishes. Perhaps this is even why they don't yet have their own church (while they do have their own restaurants, etc.), but I don't know. I attended the OCA church that some of them attend and was also given a very warm welcome despite being at that time still RC, so I can understand their attraction to that particular community, though I do pray that they get their own church soon (not because I am upset at OO receiving at EO churches, but because until communion is restored I would rather an OO church be established, as I have been told in no uncertain terms that I as a Coptic Orthodox Christian that I am to not receive in the OCA church under any circumstances; I guess not all jurisdictions or all places are equally permissive).

At my EO parish we have Copts and Ethiopians and the priest communes them. In point of fact he and I talked about the schism when I met with him and he directly told me he'd have no problem with my joining the OO communion. In his mind, at least, the schism doesn't seem to be terribly important.

If you are still speaking about Kern County, the Eritreans (not Ethiopians, although there are a few) attend the EO Church, and most of their kids are baptized in the EO Church. The only ones Communing are those baptized and prepared in the EO Church. OO cannot and will not commune in an EO Church, and vice versa.

OrthoNoob, something is very wrong with that statement, and I'd recommend you speak with the bishop about it. Either it wasn't relayed correctly, or there is something deeply incorrect. Doesn't matter what 'his mind thinks', the Church is solid on it, and has been for 1500 years.

If you are still speaking about Kern County, the Eritreans (not Ethiopians, although there are a few) attend the EO Church, and most of their kids are baptized in the EO Church. The only ones Communing are those baptized and prepared in the EO Church. OO cannot and will not commune in an EO Church, and vice versa.

OrthoNoob, something is very wrong with that statement, and I'd recommend you speak with the bishop about it. Either it wasn't relayed correctly, or there is something deeply incorrect. Doesn't matter what 'his mind thinks', the Church is solid on it, and has been for 1500 years.

It could be a case where OOs communing in EO churches have been received into the EO Church through communion (after talking with the priest and whatever else is done) and do not commune in OO churches anymore.

Logged

Quote from: GabrieltheCelt

If you spend long enough on this forum, you'll come away with all sorts of weird, untrue ideas of Orthodox Christianity.

Quote from: orthonorm

I would suggest most persons in general avoid any question beginning with why.

If you are still speaking about Kern County, the Eritreans (not Ethiopians, although there are a few) attend the EO Church, and most of their kids are baptized in the EO Church. The only ones Communing are those baptized and prepared in the EO Church. OO cannot and will not commune in an EO Church, and vice versa.

OrthoNoob, something is very wrong with that statement, and I'd recommend you speak with the bishop about it. Either it wasn't relayed correctly, or there is something deeply incorrect. Doesn't matter what 'his mind thinks', the Church is solid on it, and has been for 1500 years.

It could be a case where OOs communing in EO churches have been received into the EO Church through communion (after talking with the priest and whatever else is done) and do not commune in OO churches anymore.

One Coptic man at my parish told me there was no schism.

EDIT: Well, he didn't say that in so many words. But if I asked him if he'd had to convert, he acted like I was talking nonsense. "Convert to what?" And when I asked him whether Copts receive communion in Greek Churches, he said "Yes." and that it was all the same. No one's trying to hide the schism, mind, and there's at least one man in my parish who grew up Coptic and was Chrismated in the GO Patriarchate of Alexandria. But in the minds of most cradle EOs and OOs in Egypt, it seems, the schism does not exist.

OrthoNoob, it would appear that this erroneous viewpoint is based on ignorance. Try telling the Ecumenical Council of Chalcedon that there is no schism, or the generations to follow. Whether it be a simple lack of education on the matter, a lack of relationship with a spiritual father or parish priest, or a general disregard and denial, none can be justified. It's not a matter of locale and language difference but the confession of faith related to Christ's Divinity and Humanity, which depicts our view of Creation, Fall, Incarnation, Salvation etc.

Edit: would you think the same disregard "convert to what?" attitude would make much sense for a Catholic, whose confession has been apart from the Church for less time? You'll get the same attitude anywhere that has had the ancient faith from the time of the Apostles. Antioch, Jerusalem, and Egypt all have this unique "issue", and most lay people don't care to know more than where they were baptized. It's up to the clergy to be truthful and informative. Anyone denying the cause for the martyrs of the faith is causing grave harm

OrthoNoob, it would appear that this erroneous viewpoint is based on ignorance. Try telling the Ecumenical Council of Chalcedon that there is no schism, or the generations to follow. Whether it be a simple lack of education on the matter, a lack of relationship with a spiritual father or parish priest, or a general disregard and denial, none can be justified. It's not a matter of locale and language difference but the confession of faith related to Christ's Divinity and Humanity, which depicts our view of Creation, Fall, Incarnation, Salvation etc.

One of us apparently didn't get the memo.

Logged

Quote from: GabrieltheCelt

If you spend long enough on this forum, you'll come away with all sorts of weird, untrue ideas of Orthodox Christianity.

Quote from: orthonorm

I would suggest most persons in general avoid any question beginning with why.

OrthoNoob, it would appear that this erroneous viewpoint is based on ignorance. Try telling the Ecumenical Council of Chalcedon that there is no schism, or the generations to follow. Whether it be a simple lack of education on the matter, a lack of relationship with a spiritual father or parish priest, or a general disregard and denial, none can be justified. It's not a matter of locale and language difference but the confession of faith related to Christ's Divinity and Humanity, which depicts our view of Creation, Fall, Incarnation, Salvation etc.

I am quite aware that there is in fact a schism, thanks. My point was that, right or not, OOs do receive communion in EO churches without being made aware of the schism and switching allegiances to the EO Church.

Any OO receiving communion at an EO Church with the knowledge of the communing clergy should be instructed immediately...for their own salvation and that of the communing clergy. Each communicant is under the responsibility of the communing clergy. If they were Chrismated EO then they are no longer OO.

Any OO receiving communion at an EO Church with the knowledge of the communing clergy should be instructed immediately...for their own salvation and that of the communing clergy. Each communicant is under the responsibility of the communing clergy. If they were Chrismated EO then they are no longer OO.

OO communing at EO churches, with full acknowledgment from proper clergy, is a regular occurrence in many places.

Any OO receiving communion at an EO Church with the knowledge of the communing clergy should be instructed immediately...for their own salvation and that of the communing clergy. Each communicant is under the responsibility of the communing clergy. If they were Chrismated EO then they are no longer OO.

OO communing at EO churches, with full acknowledgment from proper clergy, is a regular occurrence in many places.

I am assuming you don't mean former OO communing as EO. Any occurrence, common or otherwise, is horribly wrong and I am highly doubtful any bishop would be okay with such a thing.

Any OO receiving communion at an EO Church with the knowledge of the communing clergy should be instructed immediately...for their own salvation and that of the communing clergy. Each communicant is under the responsibility of the communing clergy. If they were Chrismated EO then they are no longer OO.

OO communing at EO churches, with full acknowledgment from proper clergy, is a regular occurrence in many places.

I am assuming you don't mean former OO communing as EO. Any occurrence, common or otherwise, is horribly wrong and I am highly doubtful any bishop would be okay with such a thing.

I've heard it's actually the policy of the OCA. Let me see if I can find some documentation to back that up...I'll get back to you.

EDIT: 'Twould seem that as of May of this year, Orientals could be received to the Orthodox Church in America through Confession and Communion but could not receive in the EO Church if they maintained communion with their native Church. This weighs against the idea of communing them without receiving them, it would seem.

There aren't any nearby OO churches, but my parish has a decent sized Ethiopian presence. The children, who may have be EO but I can't say for sure, all commune. If I recall correctly, I don't think I've seen any of the adults commune.

In fact, our parish this past Sunday sang "many years" to a couple that are returning to Ethiopia.

I am assuming you don't mean former OO communing as EO. Any occurrence, common or otherwise, is horribly wrong and I am highly doubtful any bishop would be okay with such a thing.

There are many threads on this forum that give such examples. This is apparently common in the Middle East, especially between the Syriac and the Antiochians. In fact, there was a mutual pastoral letter between Patriarchs Ignatius and Ignatius on not receiving converts between churches, etc.

For many Byzantine Orthodox this is a simple schism, not an issue of heresy. (Where have you people been the last 50ish years? :-) ) I can think of multiple cases here in the States where Oriental Orthodox are allowed to commune without being required to transfer their membership from their national church to the OCA or the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese, and at least one case in which the Ethiopians at a Greek Orthodox parish are working from within the parish to establish their own parish in the area (with the support of the Greeks, who were very kind in welcoming a number of Habesha refugees to their parish over the years).

I'm not sure about other groups, but the overall Ethiopian Orthodox practice regarding preparation for communion is very strict and many people are only civilly married as there is no allowance for divorce in the Ethiopian Orthodox Tradition, so children and the old tend to be the only ones who commune. (That's certainly that case in Ethiopia anyways.)

Any OO receiving communion at an EO Church with the knowledge of the communing clergy should be instructed immediately...for their own salvation and that of the communing clergy. Each communicant is under the responsibility of the communing clergy. If they were Chrismated EO then they are no longer OO.

OO communing at EO churches, with full acknowledgment from proper clergy, is a regular occurrence in many places.

I am assuming you don't mean former OO communing as EO. Any occurrence, common or otherwise, is horribly wrong and I am highly doubtful any bishop would be okay with such a thing.

I've heard it's actually the policy of the OCA. Let me see if I can find some documentation to back that up...I'll get back to you.

EDIT: 'Twould seem that as of May of this year, Orientals could be received to the Orthodox Church in America through Confession and Communion but could not receive in the EO Church if they maintained communion with their native Church. This weighs against the idea of communing them without receiving them, it would seem.